Phoenix got disbarred 2 months from Bridge To Turnabout.I was hoping it happens one year exactly after it instead of 2 months. If he got disbarred in 2020, it'll be more fitting for "Dark age of the law" since UR-1 happens in 2020, since it's happen in the same year, and that how media quickly attacks the LAW. It also allows some fan to create their own fangames without resorting to creating AU, where he didn't got disbarred.

In the original version of 1-2, Redd White refers to the Chief Prosecutor using male pronouns, yet 1-5 states that Lana Skye has been the Chief Prosecutor for the past two years. Ace Attorney Triliogy retcons this mistake out.

Also, in the original version of 2-4, Phoenix says that Edgeworth hasn't prosecuted since he was the defendant in 1-4, but Edgeworth is the prosecutor in 1-5. AAT also retcons this out as well.

Phoenix got disbarred 2 months from Bridge To Turnabout.I was hoping it happens one year exactly after it instead of 2 months. If he got disbarred in 2020, it'll be more fitting for "Dark age of the law" since UR-1 happens in 2020, since it's happen in the same year, and that how media quickly attacks the LAW. It also allows some fan to create their own fangames without resorting to creating AU, where he didn't got disbarred.

In the original version of 1-2, Redd White refers to the Chief Prosecutor using male pronouns, yet 1-5 states that Lana Skye has been the Chief Prosecutor for the past two years. Ace Attorney Triliogy retcons this mistake out.

Also, in the original version of 2-4, Phoenix says that Edgeworth hasn't prosecuted since he was the defendant in 1-4, but Edgeworth is the prosecutor in 1-5. AAT also retcons this out as well.

I never said that retcons don't happen in the series. I'm saying that the (hypothetical) retcons that will be posted here won't be any realistic expectation, that people know they most likely won't happen.

The whole short time between GS3 and GS4 thing has always bothered me as well, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, on a thematic level, I don't like that GS3 has Phoenix really reach his pinnacle as a lawyer and then loses that so quickly. I also don't buy that Maya wouldn't be there for the case, as she'd need time to really get used to her role as a spirit medium at Kurain. it becomes even more complicated if you consider PLvsAA canon. (I originally was quick to discount the game as non-canon for AA, but if you've played it to the end you know that it actually works ok in the semi "realism" of the AA series. In the game, Maya at one point makes a reference to 3-5, which means it can only come after GS3. Personally I like havin PLvsAA there, as to me it feels like a good "final case" for Maya and Phoenix to have before she takes over being the head medium.)

However, I don't ever see them doing anything about it, as in order to even know about that you have to really study the thing anyway. The only date ever really mentioned in AA is the date of the DL-6 case in 2001. Everything else is "7 years ago", "3 years ago", etc. I just choose to ignore the "in the same year" thing and pretend that the events of AJ's flashback case happen a year later. I haven't had any continuity issues with AJ or DD because moving them all up a year doesn't alter the game since there aren't any dates to my knowledge.

Actually, how was it decided that that case took place months after 3-3? was it just the most logical choice or was there hard evidence somewhere to prove it?

Regarding other retcons, the games are really good about not contradicting each other that much, mostly because due to the nature of a murder mystery the games tend to be very focused on the plot and less about the lore or mythology of the series. Most of the retcons I can think of seem to have been fixed in the trilogy collection (which I haven't played yet).

Oh I have one: explain in-universe why every character in the game has a cell phone about 5 years too old.

I just choose to ignore the "in the same year" thing and pretend that the events of AJ's flashback case happen a year later. I haven't had any continuity issues with AJ or DD because moving them all up a year doesn't alter the game since there aren't any dates to my knowledge.

Actually, how was it decided that that case took place months after 3-3? was it just the most logical choice or was there hard evidence somewhere to prove it?

AJ and DD don't give years, but they give ages. Mostly in the Court Record, sometimes in dialogue. Phoenix was 26 in T&T and 33 and AJ, which implies it's supposed to take place 7 years later. Since Phoenix was disbarred 7 years before AJ, that means Zak's trial takes place shortly after 3-5...

However, as it has been mentioned in other topics, the developers didn't do the math correctly. By the end of AJ, Phoenix should have turned 34. The same problem carried on to DD (Phoenix should be 1 year older in 5-3, 5-4 and 5-5; Miles and Pearls should be 1 year older in 5-5). In fact, the only way for all the ages to make sense is if Zak's trial takes place before T&T, in April 2018 (which of course wouldn't be possible, since Phoenix still has his badge in T&T).

I just choose to ignore the "in the same year" thing and pretend that the events of AJ's flashback case happen a year later. I haven't had any continuity issues with AJ or DD because moving them all up a year doesn't alter the game since there aren't any dates to my knowledge.

Actually, how was it decided that that case took place months after 3-3? was it just the most logical choice or was there hard evidence somewhere to prove it?

AJ and DD don't give years, but they give ages. Mostly in the Court Record, sometimes in dialogue. Phoenix was 26 in T&T and 33 and AJ, which implies it's supposed to take place 7 years later. Since Phoenix was disbarred 7 years before AJ, that means Zak's trial takes place shortly after 3-5...

However, as it has been mentioned in other topics, the developers didn't do the math correctly. By the end of AJ, Phoenix should have turned 34. The same problem carried on to DD (Phoenix should be 1 year older in 5-3, 5-4 and 5-5; Miles and Pearls should be 1 year older in 5-5). In fact, the only way for all the ages to make sense is if Zak's trial takes place before T&T, in April 2018 (which of course wouldn't be possible, since Phoenix still has his badge in T&T).

Oh yeah now I remember, thanks for reminding me.

I think that's probably the most valid way to organize dates for the wiki or other data, but considering the developers weren't perfect with it and its such a vague way of counting the years, I still feel like there's room for doubt. I wish Takumi would have spoken about it, although I can't think of a context in which he would have.

Either way its not really a big deal, as I don't think the games or the players get too wrapped up in dates when they're actually playing the games.

Well let's see, we learn that you need to know the face an true name of the victim you are going to channel.We also learn, a person when channeld, get's there memory cut off from death or last channelment and not knowing time has passed.

When Mia got channeled, it's a if she was looking at the scenario from the twilight realm.

I don't see the knowing face and name conflicting with anything from the trilogy. That with Mia is true, though. She did seem fully aware of what had been going on before her channeling. In 3-5 she mentions her and Maya writing notes to each other before/during her being chanelled, but it doesn't apply to when she pops up randomly in trials without Maya having planned it.

Regarding the original post, I would rather UR-1 got pushed back a year so it occurred in October of 2019, the same year as Phoenix's disbarment. It moves these two significant events for the backstory of DD closer together and gives Athena one more year to study to be a lawyer.

The name and face was implied in 3-5. If I recall correctly, Morgan's letter had a picture of Dahlia, allowing Pearl to channel her.

I don't see the knowing face and name conflicting with anything from the trilogy. That with Mia is true, though. She did seem fully aware of what had been going on before her channeling. In 3-5 she mentions her and Maya writing notes to each other before/during her being chanelled, but it doesn't apply to when she pops up randomly in trials without Maya having planned it.

1) They DO remember all the events BEFORE their death. It's just that...

2) Mia knows what is going on BETWEEN her channelment in a snap, this is information you would have no IDEA of knowing if your death was the last thing you remember before being channelled.

I don't see the knowing face and name conflicting with anything from the trilogy. That with Mia is true, though. She did seem fully aware of what had been going on before her channeling. In 3-5 she mentions her and Maya writing notes to each other before/during her being chanelled, but it doesn't apply to when she pops up randomly in trials without Maya having planned it.

1) They DO remember all the events BEFORE their death. It's just that...

2) Mia knows what is going on BETWEEN her channelment in a snap, this is information you would have no IDEA of knowing if your death was the last thing you remember before being channelled.

Like, what Mia said to Dahlia. That her ultimate punishment was to exist forever being Dahlia "Loser" Hawthorne. Not much of a punishment if spirits are unconscious until they are channeled, as SoJ implied. And that information didn't have any impact on the plot either, or did it?

Like, what Mia said to Dahlia. That her ultimate punishment was to exist forever being Dahlia "Loser" Hawthorne. Not much of a punishment if spirits are unconscious until they are channeled, as SoJ implied. And that information didn't have any impact on the plot either, or did it?

Maybe they are not unconscious in the twilight realm.Maybe they are fully conscience in the twilight realm and cannot interact with the world of the living only observe.I think to prevent them to do whatever they plan to when they get channelled, they lose their memories of the twilight realm when they get channelled.

I don't see the knowing face and name conflicting with anything from the trilogy.

Yes. In the letter given to Pearl, Morgan wrote down Dahlia's full name, as well as attaching a photo of her, specifically stating that it was necessary to channel her.

But then a question popped into my head: how did Maya channel Dahlia when she was in the Inner Temple? Mia could've easily written her name in the memo, but what about her face? I don't recall she ever saw her face, not even when Dahlia/Misty attacked her, since it was too dark.

Am I missing something?

Gregory... Tomorrow, I'm heading towards that fateful place with your son. To find out the truth of 18 years ago...

I don't see the knowing face and name conflicting with anything from the trilogy.

It's not meant to conflict with the original trilogy, I just wanted to say that for completion.

Slammer wrote:

Yes. In the letter given to Pearl, Morgan wrote down Dahlia's full name, as well as attaching a photo of her, specifically stating that it was necessary to channel her.

But then a question popped into my head: how did Maya channel Dahlia when she was in the Inner Temple? Mia could've easily written her name in the memo, but what about her face? I don't recall she ever saw her face, not even when Dahlia/Misty attacked her, since it was too dark.

Yes. In the letter given to Pearl, Morgan wrote down Dahlia's full name, as well as attaching a photo of her, specifically stating that it was necessary to channel her.

But then a question popped into my head: how did Maya channel Dahlia when she was in the Inner Temple? Mia could've easily written her name in the memo, but what about her face? I don't recall she ever saw her face, not even when Dahlia/Misty attacked her, since it was too dark.

Am I missing something?

Methinks you're onto something...[/quote]

Mia could have said in the memo that Dahlia's face was exactly the same as Iris, and since Maya does know Iris, she could have channeled Dahlia.

Yes. In the letter given to Pearl, Morgan wrote down Dahlia's full name, as well as attaching a photo of her, specifically stating that it was necessary to channel her.

But then a question popped into my head: how did Maya channel Dahlia when she was in the Inner Temple? Mia could've easily written her name in the memo, but what about her face? I don't recall she ever saw her face, not even when Dahlia/Misty attacked her, since it was too dark.

Am I missing something?

Mia could have said in the memo that Dahlia's face was exactly the same as Iris, and since Maya does know Iris, she could have channeled Dahlia.

Hey, I think you're right! Thank you!

Gregory... Tomorrow, I'm heading towards that fateful place with your son. To find out the truth of 18 years ago...

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum